The Legal Frameworks of the Right to Request the Deletion of Personal Data in the EU, the U.S. and Japan and the Right to Be Forgotten: A Study Focusing on Search Businesses

Author(s):  
Mika Nakashima
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-101
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gebuza

AbstractThe main aim of the article is to provide analysis on the notion of the right to be forgotten developed by the CJEU in the ruling Google v. AEPD & Gonzalez and by the General Data Protection Regulation within the context of the processing of personal data on the Internet. The analysis provides the comparison of approach towards the notion between European and American jurisprudence and doctrine, in order to demonstrate the scale of difficulty in applying the concept in practice.


Author(s):  
Svetlana Sitņikova

“Tiesības tikt aizmirstam” ir samērā jauns tiesību institūts, kura aktualizēšanas priekšnosacījums ir tehnoloģiju attīstība un globalizācija, kas šobrīd ļauj padarīt informāciju, tostarp arī personas datus un sensitīvus datus, publiski pieejamu visā pasaulē. Iepriekš minētais rada nepieciešamību veicināt personas datu aizsardzību. “Tiesības tikt aizmirstam” īpaši tika aktualizētas saistībā ar Eiropas Savienības tiesas lēmumu lietā C-131/12 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. pret Agencia de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González (t. s. Google v Spain lieta). Arī Eiropas Cilvēktiesību tiesa saskaras ar jaunām koncepcijām, no kurām viena ir “tiesības tikt aizmirstam”. Veicot pētījumu, tika iegūtas šādas atziņas: “tiesības tikt aizmirstam” var tikt iekļautas zem privātuma tiesībām, un šīs tiesības izriet no spēkā esošiem gan Eiropas Savienības tiesību aktiem, gan Latvijas Republikas normatīvajiem aktiem. The “right to be forgotten” is a relatively new legal institution and the prerequisites for it are rapid technological developments and globalisation, which now allow to make information, including personal data and sensitive data, publicly available worldwide. The above mentioned requires the enhancement of the personal data protection. The “right to be forgotten” had been brought up to date particularly in relation to the EU Court of Justice’s decision in case C-131/12 Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González. The European Court of Human Rights is facing new concepts such as that of the “right to be forgotten”. The following conclusions are made when conducting the research: the “right to be forgotten” is the element of the right to privacy, and it can be derived from the existing EU law and Latvian regulation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 125
Author(s):  
GULNAZ AYDIN RZAYEVA ◽  
AYTAKIN NAZIM IBRAHIMOVA

The development of new technologies also has an impact on human rights. In the previous “epochs” of global information society, it was stated that that traditional rights can be exercised online. For instance, in 2012 (and again in 2014 and 2016), the UN Human Rights Council emphasized that ‘the same rights granted to people, so to speak, in an “offline” manner, must be protected online as well’. This, in its turn, implicitly brought to the reality that the new technetronic society did not create new rights. Though, we should take into consideration that in the digital world national legislative norms that guarantee the confidentiality of personal data often do not catch up with the technological development and, thus, can’t ensure confidentiality online. Therefore, the impact of digitalization on human rights within the frames of international and national laws should be broadly analysed and studied. The article’s objective is to analyze the impact of new technologies on human rights in the context of the right to be forgotten and right to privacy. Because the development of new technologies is more closely linked to the security of personal data. With the formation of the right to be forgotten, it is the issue of ensuring the confidentiality of certain contents of personal data as a result of the influence of the time factor. The authors conclude that, the right to be forgotten was previously defended more in the context of the right to privacy. However, they cannot be considered equal rights. The right to be forgotten stems from a person’s desire to develop and continue his or her life independently without being the object of criticism for any negative actions he or she has committed in the past. If the right to privacy contains generally confidential information, the right to be forgotten is understood as the deletion of known information at a certain time and the denial of access to third parties. Thus, the right to be forgotten is not included in the right to privacy, and can be considered an independent right. The point is that the norms of the international and national documents, which establish fundamental human rights and freedoms, do not regulate issues related to the right to be forgotten. The right to be forgotten should be limited to the deletion of information from the media and Internet information resources. This is not about the complete destruction of information available in state information systems. Another conclusion of authors is that the media and Internet information resources sometimes spread false information. In this case, there will be no content of the right to be forgotten. Because the main thing is that the information that constitutes the content of the right to be forgotten must be legal, but after some time it has lost its significance. The scope of information included in the content of the right to be forgotten should not only be related to the conviction, but also to other special personal data (for example, the fact of divorce).


Author(s):  
Valentina Amenta ◽  
Adriana Lazzaroni ◽  
Laura Abba

In this chapter, the analysis will focus on the concept of digital identity which is evolving and changing, based on the experiences that every individual lives. The chapter further highlights how the digital identity includes the fundamental human rights such as the right to a name, the right of reply, the right to protection of personal data and the right to an image. In translating the right to personal identity to our digitalized era, with its massive use of social networks, we have added to the related decalogue of rights the right to oblivion, equally called right to be forgotten. Given the complexity of the subject, the chapter develops an analysis of the actual international regulatory trends.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 1283-1308
Author(s):  
Jie (Jeanne) Huang

AbstractThe recent COVID-19 outbreak has pushed the tension of protecting personal data in a transnational context to an apex. Using a real case where the personal data of an international traveler was illegally released by Chinese media, this Article identifies three trends that have emerged at each stage of conflict-of-laws analysis for lex causae: (1) The EU, the US, and China characterize the right to personal data differently; (2) the spread-out unilateral applicable law approach comes from the fact that all three jurisdictions either consider the law for personal data protection as a mandatory law or adopt connecting factors leading to the law of the forum; and (3) the EU and China strongly advocate deAmericanization of substantive data protection laws. The trends and their dynamics provide valuable implications for developing the choice of laws for transnational personal data. First, this finding informs parties that jurisdiction is a predominant issue in data breach cases because courts and regulators would apply the law of the forum. Second, currently, there is no international treaty or model law on choice-of-law issues for transnational personal data. International harmonization efforts will be a long and difficult journey considering how the trends demonstrate not only the states’ irreconcilable interests but also how states may consider these interests as their fundamental values that they do not want to trade off. Therefore, for states and international organizations, a feasible priority is to achieve regional coordination or interoperation among states with similar values on personal data protection.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-270
Author(s):  
Joanna Ryszka

Implementation of the internal market is one of the basic aims of cooperation between Member States within the EU, being at the same time an integration area that is perceived positively by both their supporters and opponents. Issues related to the implementation of the internal market freedoms are even more interesting in its confrontation with the protection of fundamental rights. This is undoubtedly a significant issue when we think about the degree of identification of the Union citizens with the Union itself. The reviewed monograph takes all the above-mentioned elements, focusing in particular on examining how and to what extent the protection of these rights is implemented in the EU legislation on the internal market. The scientific analysis carried out within its scope covered such important and basic rights as personal data protection, freedom of expression, basic rights related to the performance of work and the right to health protection.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Saharuddin Saharuddin

Article 26 paragraph (3) of Law number 19 the Year 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions (The ITE Law) in Indonesian concerning the right to be forgotten. The contents of this article allow a person based on a court order to ask the electronic system administrator to delete irrelevant electronic information that is under their control. This provision conflicts with several other rights, which are also regulated in several laws. Like the location of the intersection right to be forgotten with the protection of personal data and public access to information.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document